Mediaboss Marketing

OPINION:

Earth Day used to be a celebration of our individual and collective responsibility to protect the planet and improve human health. It was about science and data. Unfortunately, today, Earth Day has little to do with the planet and more to do with far-left agendas meant to increase control over the population.

The paint-throwing, street-blocking activists will be out in force pushing their narrative of climate doom, more than happy to ignore science in the process. The media will reflexively add credibility to the nonsense.

President Biden will tout the importance of some patently unachievable electric vehicle or emissions goal. Social media Pied Pipers will play their silly tune about how more of our money in the hands of runaway bureaucracy can change the temperature of the Earth.

Todays socialist Democrats have used climate change to alter the national conversation from reasoned environmental protection to an irrational, emotionally damaging hysteria only loosely based on science.

The information management is working. Mr. Biden has spent hundreds of billions supposedly addressing the climate. The return on this alleged investment in protecting the planets ecosystem is not proven by scientific data and analysis, making it the perfect perennial excuse for more spending and more government.

As was laid bare at the height of the pandemic, far-left liberals in America are willing to be openly anti-science to drive their agenda of division and control. They routinely ignore or deny the substantial environmental progress that the United States has made in the last half a century, as well as the nations long-standing leadership role in environmental protection.

They ignore that even before the breathless push for electric vehicles and emissions caps, the U.S. was beating Europe in reducing carbon dioxide emissions. They ignore that while geologic history and environmental science make clear that the climate changes, there is little scientific data to support any effort by the U.S. government or Western governments collectively to affect the planets temperature.

They ignore that since the 1960s, predictions of overpopulation, running out of fossil fuels, palm trees growing in New Yorks Central Park, a new ice age that would turn most of the country into Fargo in January, and dozens of other theories about climate doom have been inaccurate.

In 1989, The Associated Press ran a story that proclaimed Rising Seas Could Obliterate Nations in just 11 years. A senior U.N. environmental official at the time, Noel Brown, said that entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.

The United Nations and Mr. Biden have repeatedly doubled down on the notion that the planet will be unlivable within a decade if we dont give far-left institutions more power, money and control.

In recent congressional hearings, however, Biden administration officials couldnt provide any projections for the impact of the proposed spending and regulations. They didnt even know how much carbon dioxide was in the atmosphere.

Most tellingly, climate activists routinely ignore the massive environmental destruction, including deforestation, which affects emissions and air quality, as well as human rights violations associated with mining for lithium and cobalt, two components necessary for electric vehicle battery production.

EVs put money in the pocket of the biggest global polluter and most prolific human rights violator, China. The leftists dont care. They ignore that EV adoption will require massive increases in power generation, which will, in fact, increase emissions to accomplish.

They often ignore that photosynthesis something most of us learned about in third grade is a scientifically proven way to clean our air. But planting more trees is so 1970s. It doesnt require massive new bureaucracies and controls.

How many people think the U.S. is the source of the vast majority of ocean plastic? Three-quarters of it actually comes from a few Asian countries, including China and India.

The far left ignores the medical data that climate chaos messaging is adding to the mental health crisis among young people.

Earth Day, climate change and eco-doomsdayism is not about earth science. Its about projection.

The far left uses climate chaos to deflect blame for just about everything, from immigration to asthma to obesity to crime. They use it to cover failed policies and the repeated failures of government programming to solve any crisis. It all is neatly pushed off on this murky, manufactured enemy.

As with so many other issues that are favorites of todays socialists, the pattern of deceit is clear. Abortion really isnt about womens health. Welfare isnt really about empowerment or social justice. Obamacare wasnt really about cheaper health care. The trans movement isnt really about helping anyone. Electric vehicle mandates and getting rid of gas stoves arent really about the environment.

Republicans cannot be afraid to use facts and science, including medical data, to end this great con. They need to recapture the spirit of Republicans before them, who thread the needle to grow the economy, preserve freedom, and reverse the damage of a century of unbridled industrialization on the planet.

You can be pro-environment, pro-science and pro-taxpayer while continuing to make technological progress.

Protecting the environment is a critical effort that should be an ongoing human mission, but only the rational American right can revive Earth Day and make it great again.

Tom Basile is the host of America Right Now on Newsmax TV and a Washington Times columnist.

Continue reading here:
How liberals killed Earth Day - Washington Times

In The Weekly Wrap Sean Speer, our editor-at-large, analyses for Hub subscribersthe big stories shaping politics, policy, and the economy in the week that was.

Although the prime minister had already announced most of its signature measures over the previous week or so, this weeks budget still contained one notable surprise: an increase to the capital gains tax rate for capital gains above $250,000 for individuals and at any level for corporations and trusts.

We had anticipated the budget would set out tax increases for corporations and high-income earnersin fact, the March 9 edition of the Weekly Wrap warned that the budget might appeal to class warfarebut we didnt expect changes to the capital gains tax regime. The disincentives for entrepreneurship and investment seemed too high in the face of a stagnant economy, low business investment, and declining productivity.

The budget proposal, which is projected to raise nearly $20 billion in new revenues over the next five years, has generated significant criticism from entrepreneurs and investors who rightly warn that it will discourage business start-ups and capital investment. Calgary-based investor Derrick Hunter has written about these risks for The Hub.

At a time when the Canadian economy is in high demand of capital to expand the housing supply, increase business starts, and boost productivity, this is a counter-productive policy. Theres a considerable body of research that shows that capital taxes are among the most economically damaging forms of taxation. The economic costs of extracting this capital from investors and handing it over to the federal government are therefore likely to be significant. Especially since it wasnt offset by accompanying tax reductions as Hub contributor Trevor Tombe set out in his post-budget analysis.

It prompts the question: why is the Trudeau government doing this?

We know for instance from former Finance Minister Bill Morneau that its been something the government had considered and rejected in the past. It strikes me that there are three explanations for adopting it now.

Whatever the ultimate balance of factors behind the governments decision, the economic effects are still the same: hiking taxes on capital is bound to worsen Canadas investment climate and ultimately its economy as a whole.

The Trudeau government has sought to define this weeks budget in terms of generational fairness. It spoke for instance of the need to restore a fair chance for Millenials and Gen Z. Finance Minister Chrystia Freelands budget speech even claimed that we find ourselves at a pivotal moment for these cohorts.

This political positioning is understandable yet insufficient. Theres plenty of evidence that younger Canadians are feeling anxious and agitated about their circumstances. They cannot afford homes. Theyre delaying marriage and family formation. And, as we outlined this week in The Hubs first bi-weekly DeepDive, theyre increasingly unhappy.

The numbers are striking. Younger Canadians used to report higher levels of happiness than older Canadians. Not anymore. Canadians under age 30 are now on average less happy. Canadas overall level of satisfaction ranked number 15 in this years World Happiness Report. But if you limit it to younger Canadians, we actually fall to number 58 along with countries like Paraguay, Malaysia, and China.

Theres a tendency to observe these dynamics through the lens of politics. A key reason that the budget is so focused on this cohort is because it has abandoned the Liberal Party en masse. The Conservative Party of Canada is the only centre-right party in the Anglo-American world that currently has a political advantage among younger voters. These developments challenge long-standing political axioms about the interaction between demographics and political preferences.

But the biggest issue here isnt politics. Theres something far more concerning about the demographic, socio-economic and even psychological effects of large numbers of young Canadians experiencing failure to launch syndrome. It can have long-run costs and consequences for individuals and society as a whole.

Its not a coincidence for instance that the fertility rate is at an all-time low at the same time that Canadians under age 30 are reporting rising levels of unhappiness. Causality is doubtless working in both directions.

An unmarried, childless future in an ugly and overpriced, small downtown apartment is a rather grim proposition. Nothing in the totality of human experience tells us that these are the conditions for human flourishing or a successful society.

Some of the budget measures may help on the margins. But one does get the sense that theres something bigger going on here and technocratic solutions are a necessary yet insufficient response. Howard Anglins article for The Hub this weekend about building aesthetics, textured neighbourhoods, and what Tim Carney calls family-friendly communities starts to get closer to some of the underlying factors behind this generational malaise. One could also point to the void of spiritual questionsthough thats beyond the scope of public policy and certainly this essay.

I would however make the case for a lack of growth and progress as a key (and perhaps the key) explanatory factor. Here I may respectfully part company with Anglin. I dont think that people are telling us that things are moving too fast. I think in a lot of ways theyre telling us that theyre moving too slow. I subscribe to the Douthian argument that economic and technological stagnation (outside of narrow cones of progress), cultural conformity and replication, and the absence of a common project have contributed to a self-reinforcing mix of stagnancy, sterility, and drift.

Douthats solution to what he calls decadence is a combination of divine intervention and renewed technological progress (So down on our kneesand start working on that wrap drive.).

Maybe hes right. But either way, these are the precise questions that we ought to be asking before we consign a generation or two of young Canadians to an uninspiring and unfulfilling future.

Today marks something far more important than politics or public policy: its the start of the NHL playoffs and the Toronto Maple Leafs elusive search for their first Stanley Cup since 1967.

George Will likes to say that he writes about politics to support his baseball habit. I can relate. The only job that I can envision leaving The Hub for is really any role with the Maple Leafs, from team president to the guy who fills the water bottles.

Ive loved hockey ever since I can remember. I played a lot as a young personthough not particularly well. I recently wrote about my playing days, including the occasional fight, for Cardus Comment Magazine. You can find my essay here.

Will also often says that at an age too young to make life-shaping decisions, he had to choose between becoming a Chicago Cubs fan or a St. Louis Cardinals fan. Most of his friends became Cardinals fans and grew up cheerful and liberal. He chose the Cubs and grew up a gloomy conservative.

Again, I can relate. Being a Leafs fan is good training for a conservative. Its a steadfast lesson in low expectations and the inherent fallibility of man.

But Im a North American conservative so Im susceptible, however wrongheaded, to a unique continental optimism. I cant help but succumb against my better judgment to a quixotic hopefulness.

No matter how hard one tries, the Leafs invariably tempt you into believing that this year is different. Last years first-round win against the Tampa Bay Lightning set off those feelings for me. The swift second-round defeat to the Florida Panthers caused a precipitous fall back to reality.

This season Ive once again watched most of the games. I began the year determined to protect myself from inevitable disappointment. But somewhere along the way, perhaps due to Auston Matthews 69 goals or the group-think of my hockey chat groups (yes, there are two), Ive come, at an almost sub-conscious level, to believe that this might be the year.

If so, Ill need to bring my boys to Toronto for the parade because even though theyre only one and three years old, theres a good chance that it wont happen again in their lifetimes.

I suppose this is a long way of saying that if Im a bit distracted in the coming days (and hopefully weeks) its because Im focused on my real passion: hockey. Hopefully, politics and policy will cooperate and take a break for a while.

Until then, Maple Leafs forever!

See the rest here:
The Weekly Wrap: The Liberals lean all the way into class warfare - The Hub

But theres reason to believe that voters have come to these conclusions on their ownor at least not at the mainstream medias behest. Although coverage of Bidens verbal miscues has been widespread both online and in conservative media, it has only recently begun to regularly appear in mainstream outlets like the Times and CNN. Voters think that its important, and these outlets have, belatedly, begun to treat it as newsworthy. One could quibble about the fairness of these concerns given the relatively insignificant age difference between Biden and Trump, but there is no doubting that the concerns are widespread. Even Democrats on Capitol Hill have voiced them.

Part of the delight in Trump falling asleep comes from the fact that its seen as a kind of market correction: Now the media will have to cover Trumps age the way it has covered Bidens. At the same time, it also feels like a gift in kind: It muddies the waters, allowing the presidents defenders to argue that the other guy is also really old. (Theyve already been doing that for a while, to be fair.)

Still, there are a number of reasons to believe that this is not a particularly wise course of action for Democrats. For one, voters overwhelmingly think that Biden is older than Trump (because he quite literally is), and raising the salience of the age issue would likely backfire even more than it already has. Experience was once a winning issue for Biden; in 2020, many voters looked to him as a steady hand who could help steer the country out of the Covid-19 pandemic. Today, its a clear loser: He is seen as lacking the fitness and stamina for the job. Telling voters that the other guy also doesnt have fitness and stamina may not be a winning issue. At the very least, it could push voters toward comparably chipper third-party candidates like Cornel West and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who are both 70.

Originally posted here:
Liberals Are Trying to Make Trump's Age an Issue. It Won't Work. - The New Republic

Dear Editor: Reading is Everything records a milestone that remedied the education establishments greatest failure of the past three decades namely its trenchant rejection of phonics, which is the only proven method to teach kids to read who do not have enriched homelives. It took Mississippis stunningly effective adoption of phonics Mississippi! to bring us to our senses.

Not mentioned, however, is a key omission highlighting our humble need to understand that we liberals suffer from our own tribalism, not all that dissimilar to the right-wing, whom we routinely mock.

Tragically, the reason liberal educators willfully ignored 30 years of research inexcusably leaving generations of Black youth functionally illiterate in todays information age is because it was conservatives who first loudly championed phonics. In our own tribal shortsightedness, our brethren could not admit that "the other" might be right.

This rot within from overweening pride has become a pattern. Progressives have a long history that they should be proud of. But today those traditions have become corrupted by sincere but feverish bouts of badly counterproductive and performative morality plays. But because its advocates claim the progressive mantle, we are unable to see the glaring contradictions.

Thus, some now contend that the left should oppose free speech, support loyalty oaths, adopt McCarthy tactics, reject free thinkers, champion bowdlerizing the great classics of literature and succumb to the delusion that racial progress can come out of anger and revenge.

Hopefully understanding the phonics debacle will bring us to our senses.

Peter Anderson

Madison

Send your letter to the editor to tctvoice@madison.com. Include your full name, hometown and phone number. Your name and town will be published. The phone number is for verification purposes only. Please keep your letter to 250 words or less.

Original post:
Letter | Liberal tribalism led to downfall of phonics - The Capital Times

QUEBEC The Quebec Liberal Party says its leadership race will begin next January and the winner will be chosen in June 2025.

Former leader Dominique Anglade stepped down weeks after the 2022 provincial election, during which the party maintained official Opposition status but lost 10 seats.

Marc Tanguay has served as interim leader since.

Candidates will each have to make a $40,000 deposit with the party, obtain 750 signatures from 70 ridings and 12 regions, and sign up 350 new members.

Campaign expenses are capped at $400,000, and members will cast votes over six days with a leadership convention to be held on June 14, 2025.

No one has officially declared their candidacy, but current Liberal member Frdric Beauchemin and former Montreal mayor Denis Coderre have expressed interest.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published April 19, 2024.

The Canadian Press

Read more from the original source:
Quebec Liberals will choose new leader during convention in June 2025 - Yahoo News Canada